#ifndef _INPUT_H_
#define _INPUT_H_
class CInput
{
blabla;
};
extern CInput *input;
#endif
extern problem
Author
Hi!
This was probably asked many times before but i really can't find a solution.
I have few classes declared in separate header files like this:
In Windows.cpp file where i got WinMain function i include Input.h and do
CInput *input = new CInput();
But when linking, wherever i'm using input pointer (even in Windows.cpp) i get error: [Linker error] undefined reference to `input'(i'm using Dev-cpp). What's wrong?
How are you using the pointer input after you have declared it?
Are you still using the *?
Also, why are you declaring it as extern?
Are you still using the *?
Also, why are you declaring it as extern?
What does 'nm Windows.o' output (at least for the input symbol) ?
What does nm output for the other object files ?
What does nm output for the other object files ?
I see a definition but no declaration. Where exactly did you put the declaration of that pointer? it has to reside in some sourcefile somehwere you know :)
The actual instance of CInput needs to go inside the "input.cpp" file
General rules: always declare things in header files (i.e. use extern) never
place instances in header files. The instances go in the corresponding source file (*.cpp)
Basically, in your case its poor form to declare
within "input.h" and then make an instance of it within "windows.cpp".
Also, inside windows.cpp you have re-declared a private "version" of CInput
i.e. Change
CInput* input = new CInput(...)
to
input = new CInput(...)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"proper" way of doing it:
//--------------------
// input.h:
class CInput{
....
};
extern CInput input; // no pointer
//---------------------
// input.cpp:
#include "input.h"
CInput input;
General rules: always declare things in header files (i.e. use extern) never
place instances in header files. The instances go in the corresponding source file (*.cpp)
Basically, in your case its poor form to declare
extern CInput* inputwithin "input.h" and then make an instance of it within "windows.cpp".
Also, inside windows.cpp you have re-declared a private "version" of CInput
i.e. Change
CInput* input = new CInput(...)
to
input = new CInput(...)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"proper" way of doing it:
//--------------------
// input.h:
class CInput{
....
};
extern CInput input; // no pointer
//---------------------
// input.cpp:
#include "input.h"
CInput input;
Quote:Original post by TheFatGecko
Forgot to say, have a google about good c/c++ style and header files and singletons
It's not poor style, and putting the instance at static global scope could be impossible sure it's not a good idea to litter globals like that but it could be a nice way to get things done and heck you can't say for sure that that object could be constructed like that and your new line is just wrong.
About the only thing you got right was how he should declare the variable being defined in a source file.
DigitalDelusion
I don't get your critism. What's not poor style? I clearly stated that
placing a declaration in one header file and the instance in another is poor form. End of story. Whether or not the instance is a static or needs to be initialised by some class within the "input.cpp" file is up to guy writing.
I don't get your critism. What's not poor style? I clearly stated that
placing a declaration in one header file and the instance in another is poor form. End of story. Whether or not the instance is a static or needs to be initialised by some class within the "input.cpp" file is up to guy writing.
Look over what you posted.
You don't have any better style you made the (probably false) assumption that CInput could be constructed without preconditions and you botched the code.
Yes his design should probably be reworked to better hide the details either via a singleton a procedural interface or by simply passing around the CInput pointer without making it global.
So you didn't solve his problem and posted erranous code claiming it to be better, that's hardly helpful in my eyes.
You don't have any better style you made the (probably false) assumption that CInput could be constructed without preconditions and you botched the code.
Yes his design should probably be reworked to better hide the details either via a singleton a procedural interface or by simply passing around the CInput pointer without making it global.
So you didn't solve his problem and posted erranous code claiming it to be better, that's hardly helpful in my eyes.
Author
Thanks
I don't want singletons, i'm doing it just for myself so i will know which class should have only one instance. Maybe if everything will work ok i'll implement them.
I was trying to obtain a global pointer to a class, not global instance of a class (but maybe i'll change my mind). If i understood right i should put "input = new CInput();" into Input.cpp, but then how will i know when it's created i.e. before or after my logging class which will also have global pointer and will be created in the same way?
I don't want singletons, i'm doing it just for myself so i will know which class should have only one instance. Maybe if everything will work ok i'll implement them.
I was trying to obtain a global pointer to a class, not global instance of a class (but maybe i'll change my mind). If i understood right i should put "input = new CInput();" into Input.cpp, but then how will i know when it's created i.e. before or after my logging class which will also have global pointer and will be created in the same way?
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
